2004 General Election Electoral Snapshot - 3/2/04

[Stuckinthebush]

About a week ago, I started to track state polls in order to get a slice-in-time idea as to the electoral vote possibilities for the general election.

I have placed these state by state polling results on a spreadsheet and have posted it at the web link below. If I could not find up to date polling information for a state, then I assumed the 2000 results for that state. If a state does have recent polling information that I have found, the source is listed next to the states electoral votes.

Again, this is all based on current polling, so will change as we move along in the election year.

Enjoy and let me know if there are state polls that I have missed in my searches.

2004_Electoral_Snapshot

[demnan]

1. I thought it was interesting

that Georgia was now considered a tossup, and also had gained 2 electoral votes, as though a demographic shift of population from the North had occurred.

Thanks so much for making the effort to record this information.

[Stuckinthebush]

2. I did too...

I don't know much about that polling organization, but right now, the GE is within the 2 points based on that poll.

Interesting...

[cmayer]

3. Wow! Some surprises there.

I was surprised to see some of the southern states in the toss up column. TN, SC, GA. I can't believe that will last.

We have to hope that the rust belt goes into play. We can't count on FL, so we would have to make it up with something like OH or MO, and WV.

What margin did you use to decide if a state was in a Party column or a toss-up?

[Stuckinthebush]

4. Yes - the Southern states are interesting

Again, it is very early and things will change as time goes on, but it is nice to see close races in some Southern states. It could signal that there is a growing concern about Bush in some of his strongholds.

As for tossup decision, if there was overlap above or below the midpoint based on the polls margin of error, then I put the data in the tossup category.

So, if the polls MOE is 4% and the data are 44% Dem 47% Bush, then the poll is 95% confident that the data are in the 40%-48% range for Dem and 43%-51% for Bush. The 95% confidence intervals overlap past the midpoints of both Dem and Bush.

[humble truth]

5. OH is in play

Ohio has been hit hard by unemployment, and their republican governor, Bob Taft, is very unpopular at the moment. Bush's own approval rating there is at an all time low. http://www.ipr.uc.edu/PDF/OhioPoll/prezapp_021804_Final.pdf

I'll see if I can find a head-to-head poll.

[Stuckinthebush]

6. That would be wonderful...thanks!

OH is extremely important.

[humble truth]

27. I haven't found a poll yet, but...

...here's some of the typical analysis I've seen which suggests Ohio is very much in play: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/03/02/in_industrial_heartland_voters_could_turn_nov_election/

[MarianJack]

7. How About West Virginia?

Until 2000, it only went rethuglican in landslides and was normally considered a safe D state at the presidential level. Some even expected McGovern to carry it in '72!

I'd be interested in seeing why it's considered safe for pres. moron.

By the way, thanx for your work.

[Stuckinthebush]

8. It may very well be back in the D column

I just don't have access to any up to date polling data for West Virginia.

Since I don't have anything, I have to put WV in the same column as their 2000 election results show. Perhaps in the next few weeks, more state polls will come out with head to head D/R match ups - especially as the Dem nomination gets wrapped up.

[salin]

9. Thanks!

Nice work - I look forward to watching this dynamically over the year. :thumbsup:

[Stuckinthebush]

10. No problem - I enjoy it

Shoot me some state poll links if you find them.

[salin]

11. can I admit

that beyond the governor's race I find it almost too depressing to follow? Recently read a story about the region's political campaign donating trends... all but our area had huge disparities of monies going to GOP candidates. While I have a particular fondness for my home Hoosier state... there are times the politics drive me nuts.

[Pab Sungenis]

12. Analysis and strategy

I plugged your numbers into the Electoral College Calculator at http://www.grayraven.com/ec/ to get a good, visual look at the map as you have it today.

Some thoughts:

New Jersey is NOT in play. The Democrats have been building there since 1992, and we just seized solid control of both houses of the legislature. Our Democratic Governor, while still unpopular, is improving his numbers. This state should be safe for the Democrats, so I'm moving it into that column.

South Carolina, Tennesee, and Georgia? I have to give them to Shrub.

Minnesota? Shouldn't be in play. I'm going to take a chance and move it blue.

Arizona? I think it's safe to say it stays Bush.

That leaves Nevada and Pennsylvania, both of which we HAVE to win. And even THAT only forces a tie.

We need to make up some lost ground FAST.

[Stuckinthebush]

14. I'd agree with your analysis

The numbers on the spreadsheet reflect recent state polls. As we move along this year, we will see better numbers.

But I think you are absolutely correct about Nevada and Penn.

[humble truth]

20. Good adjustments

This looks pretty accurate. I've read quite a bit about Ohio's dissatisfaction with Bush, and his approval ratings there are at an all time low. The mood is good for a dem win, but I am having trouble finding a head-to-head poll. If OH is in play, our chances increase dramatically.

[cmayer]

25. Possible battlegrounds

I agree about PA. Lose that, and we lose everything. Nevada is not quite as essential. There may be some surprises in the works.

One might be AZ. I wouldn't call it a sure Red state yet in this election.

And, as I said, the rust belt. WV, OH and MO. If Edwards is VP, NC. And we need to make them work real hard in FL.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

13. Aren't there states which are NOT winner-take-all? (nt)

[Stuckinthebush]

15. No...

Edit due to information by poster below:

Evidently, the answer is yes....

[Pab Sungenis]

16. Actually, there are two.

Maine and Alaska go by Congressional districts. It is possible for them to split their votes.

[Stuckinthebush]

18. Thanks for the correction

n/t

[TahitiNut]

19. Not Alaska ... Maine and Nebraska

Both Alaska and Nebraska end in "aska" ... :silly:

(Alaska has only 1 Congressional District.)

[Pab Sungenis]

21. You're right.

I had the wrong "aska" in mind.

[TahitiNut]

17. Nebraska, I think.

It's the one with more than one House District that allocates Electoral votes according to District votes and at-large votes.

On edit: It's Nebraska and Maine that split their Electoral votes according to the votes in the Congressional Districts.

In Maine and Nebraska the 2 at-large electoral votes go to the winner of the statewide popular vote. In addition, the presidential candidate with the highest popular vote in each of the state's Congressional Districts wins 1 electoral vote from that particular district. Maine has been doing this since the 1972 presidential election. Nebraska is a newcomer to this "districting" system of allocating electoral votes to the presidential candidates in the November General Election- having had this in place only beginning with the 1996 election.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/G04/ElectorAllocation.phtml?sort=Alph

[BGrier]

22. Bush Vs. Kerry Poll At Omaha World Herald Web Site

As a resident of this far-right state, it's hard to imagine any Democrat but Bob Kerry winning a national election here.

Here's a poll from today's World Herald web site. Feel free to vote!

http://www.omaha.com

[TahitiNut]

23. Bob KerrEy or John Kerry?

:eyes:

[blindpig]

24. SC a tossup?

I find that very hard to believe. Of course, I live in the Upstate, repub heaven.
Please Powerball, please!

[Thrill]

26. I don't see why Tenn

is a suprise. The Dems should be winning Tenn. ANd WV and NH too